kirk5a wrote:Hm. I think people who love to quote SN 35.23 really need to read all "the all" suttas to be in line with what is being conveyed there. That would be SN 35.23 through 35.52. SN 35.23 does not stand alone as some kind of philosophical/metaphysical trump card. That simply establishes the scope of what the Buddha is talking about in the following suttas. The emphasis is on abandoning the all, understanding the all, experiencing revulsion and dispassion for the all, uprooting all conceivings.... for the sake of ending suffering, the liberation of the mind by non-clinging.

Good point Kirk. I don't think it's a talking about the Universe, it's talking about experience.

The Blessed One said, "And which All is a phenomenon to be abandoned? The eye is to be abandoned. Forms are to be abandoned. Consciousness at the eye is to be abandoned. Contact at the eye is to be abandoned. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the eye — experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain — that too is to be abandoned.http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

Or Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation:

“And what, bhikkhus, is the Dhamma for abandoning all? The eye is to be abandoned, forms are to be abandoned, eye-consciousness is to be abandoned, eye-contact is to be abandoned, [16] and whatever feeling arises with eye-contact as condition—whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant—that too is to be abandoned.

reflection wrote:But I don't think the dhamma is to be practiced and proven for oneself by disproving all other possibilities one by one.

If one to become a Buddhist, convert to Buddhism, then it has to be at the exclusion of all other paths.

reflection wrote:Your own experience is all you've got, it's all you have to work with.

This is one step away from solipsism!!

And by looking deeply like this, for me, the existence of something like the old Viking gods is more likely than the existence of a sort of seventh consciousness. Why? The gods may hide themselves, but if the outside-of-aggregates-consciousness would exist, it would be for me to experience. And I don't. And well, frankly I think nobody does and people mistake some form of mind-consciousness as God consciousness or nibbana consciousness.

It depends on what one means by "God." There are many doctrines on "God."

But what views and way of investigating makes me peaceful, I feel I should share sometimes.

Why, if there's no you?

What I meant is that Buddhism is not like science in the way that everything which is not proven to be false may still be true. It's like eating an unknown fruit which tastes like a banana. As soon as you taste it you know it is not an apple or a mango. You don't have to try all other fruits in the world to say "this is a banana". And so here I mean you don't have to go through all possible states of mind to come to a conclusion.

I'm not familiar with solipsism, but I said "it's what you have to work with" as a practical advise, not a philosophical point of view. I mean even the Buddha can stand right in front of us and explain the path, but if we don't walk it, we still get nowhere. So in this sense our own experience is what matters.

And to the last point I could also say "why not?". But I say the things I say with the hope of helping people. If anything just to give another possible perspective on the matter for those who may need it.

It is in this very fathom-long physical frame with its perceptions and mind, that, I declare, lies the world, and the arising of the world, and the cessation of the world, and the path leading to the cessation of the world.[26] — SN 2.26

26. The import of this significant declaration can be understood in the context of those suttas in which the Buddha defines the concept of the world. The 'world,' for the Buddha, arises in the six sense-spheres (See above Note 21). Hence its cessation too, is to be experienced there, in the cessation of the six sense-spheres (salaayatananirodha). "I will teach you, monks, how the world comes to be and passes away... What monks, is the arising of the world? Dependent on eye and forms, arises visual consciousness. The concurrence of the three is contact. Conditioned by contact is feeling. Conditioned by feeling, craving. Conditioned by craving, grasping. Conditioned by grasping, becoming. Conditioned by becoming, birth. And conditioned by birth, arise decay, death, grief lamentation, suffering, despair. This is the arising of the world. And what, monks, is the passing away of the world? Dependent on the eye and forms arise visual consciousness. The concurrence of the three is contact. Conditioned by contact is feeling. Conditioned by feeling is craving. By the utter fading away and cessation of that craving, grasping ceases, by the ceasing of grasping, becoming ceases, by the ceasing of becoming birth ceases, by the ceasing of birth, decay-and-death, grief, lamentation, suffering, despair, cease. Such is the ceasing of this entire man of Ill.

This, monks, is the passing away of the world." (Such it is also in the case of the other senses).

The same sermon is introduced in the preceding sutta with the words: "I will teach you monks, the arising and passing away of suffering..."

Alex123 wrote:Please note: The sutta doesn't say that nothing exists outside of "The All". It merely states that one cannot explain it. Furthermore, saying "it lies beyond range" appears to hint that there may be "something".

Yes, and IMO "The All" is a strategy very similar to Thanissaro's not-self strategy.

"I ride tandem with the random, Things don't run the way I planned them, In the humdrum."Peter Gabriel lyric

But the Universe is just one part of our experience....so whatever applies to our experience also applies to the Universe!chownah

Perhaps I should have said "the whole Universe"...

Mike

I don't want to make a pest of myself but the whole Universe is just one part of our experience....or one might think that the whole Universe comprises the entirety our experience.....so whatever applies to our experience also applies to the whole Universe....or one might think that it also applies to some part of the whole Universe.

Can you think of any part of your experience which is not part of the whole Universe?......and conversely can you think of any part (or the entirety) of the whole Universe which is not part of your experience?

reflection wrote:I'm not familiar with solipsism, but I said "it's what you have to work with" as a practical advise, not a philosophical point of view.

Solipsism (Listeni/ˈsɒlɨpsɪzəm/; from Latin solus, meaning "alone", and ipse, meaning "self") is the philosophical idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist. As an epistemological position, solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one's own mind is unsure. The external world and other minds cannot be known, and might not exist outside the mind. As a metaphysical position, solipsism goes further to the conclusion that the world and other minds do not exist. As such it is the only epistemological position that, by its own postulate, is both irrefutable and yet indefensible in the same manner.

Solipsism sometimes arises as an unintended consequence of some lines of reasoning.

tiltbillings wrote:

It is in this very fathom-long physical frame with its perceptions and mind, that, I declare, lies the world, and the arising of the world, and the cessation of the world, and the path leading to the cessation of the world.[26] — SN 2.26

26. The import of this significant declaration can be understood in the context of those suttas in which the Buddha defines the concept of the world. The 'world,' for the Buddha, arises in the six sense-spheres (See above Note 21). Hence its cessation too, is to be experienced there, in the cessation of the six sense-spheres (salaayatananirodha). "I will teach you, monks, how the world comes to be and passes away... What monks, is the arising of the world? Dependent on eye and forms, arises visual consciousness. The concurrence of the three is contact. Conditioned by contact is feeling. Conditioned by feeling, craving. Conditioned by craving, grasping. Conditioned by grasping, becoming. Conditioned by becoming, birth. And conditioned by birth, arise decay, death, grief lamentation, suffering, despair. This is the arising of the world. And what, monks, is the passing away of the world? Dependent on the eye and forms arise visual consciousness. The concurrence of the three is contact. Conditioned by contact is feeling. Conditioned by feeling is craving. By the utter fading away and cessation of that craving, grasping ceases, by the ceasing of grasping, becoming ceases, by the ceasing of becoming birth ceases, by the ceasing of birth, decay-and-death, grief, lamentation, suffering, despair, cease. Such is the ceasing of this entire man of Ill.

This, monks, is the passing away of the world." (Such it is also in the case of the other senses).

The same sermon is introduced in the preceding sutta with the words: "I will teach you monks, the arising and passing away of suffering..."

kirk5a wrote:Hm. I think people who love to quote SN 35.23 really need to read all "the all" suttas to be in line with what is being conveyed there. That would be SN 35.23 through 35.52. SN 35.23 does not stand alone as some kind of philosophical/metaphysical trump card. That simply establishes the scope of what the Buddha is talking about in the following suttas. The emphasis is on abandoning the all, understanding the all, experiencing revulsion and dispassion for the all, uprooting all conceivings.... for the sake of ending suffering, the liberation of the mind by non-clinging.

binocular wrote:Does anyone here think that the above is a form of solipsism?

That would be so, assuming that the Buddha was doing a Western style descriptive philosophy, which he did not. The quote in question is not making a descriptive comment on reality. It is making a comment on soteriology/epistemology, what is necessary to know for awakening.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

chownah wrote:and conversely can you think of any part (or the entirety) of the whole Universe which is not part of your experience?

Another person's privacy - another person's kamma, for example.

This can't be kamma. There is nothing independently arising anywhere. There is no privacy of action. This idea of 'another person's kamma' is central to the WORLD of suffering. A sort of escapism. Even liberation does not arise by itself it's beginning is with the damma which did not arise by itself either.

reflection wrote:I'm not familiar with solipsism, but I said "it's what you have to work with" as a practical advise, not a philosophical point of view.

Solipsism (Listeni/ˈsɒlɨpsɪzəm/; from Latin solus, meaning "alone", and ipse, meaning "self") is the philosophical idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist. As an epistemological position, solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one's own mind is unsure. The external world and other minds cannot be known, and might not exist outside the mind. As a metaphysical position, solipsism goes further to the conclusion that the world and other minds do not exist. As such it is the only epistemological position that, by its own postulate, is both irrefutable and yet indefensible in the same manner.

Solipsism sometimes arises as an unintended consequence of some lines of reasoning.

tiltbillings wrote:

It is in this very fathom-long physical frame with its perceptions and mind, that, I declare, lies the world, and the arising of the world, and the cessation of the world, and the path leading to the cessation of the world.[26] — SN 2.26

26. The import of this significant declaration can be understood in the context of those suttas in which the Buddha defines the concept of the world. The 'world,' for the Buddha, arises in the six sense-spheres (See above Note 21). Hence its cessation too, is to be experienced there, in the cessation of the six sense-spheres (salaayatananirodha). "I will teach you, monks, how the world comes to be and passes away... What monks, is the arising of the world? Dependent on eye and forms, arises visual consciousness. The concurrence of the three is contact. Conditioned by contact is feeling. Conditioned by feeling, craving. Conditioned by craving, grasping. Conditioned by grasping, becoming. Conditioned by becoming, birth. And conditioned by birth, arise decay, death, grief lamentation, suffering, despair. This is the arising of the world. And what, monks, is the passing away of the world? Dependent on the eye and forms arise visual consciousness. The concurrence of the three is contact. Conditioned by contact is feeling. Conditioned by feeling is craving. By the utter fading away and cessation of that craving, grasping ceases, by the ceasing of grasping, becoming ceases, by the ceasing of becoming birth ceases, by the ceasing of birth, decay-and-death, grief, lamentation, suffering, despair, cease. Such is the ceasing of this entire man of Ill.

This, monks, is the passing away of the world." (Such it is also in the case of the other senses).

The same sermon is introduced in the preceding sutta with the words: "I will teach you monks, the arising and passing away of suffering..."

Nope what is forgotten is what is not spoken about, that which can't be uttered without mind and consciousness. What is uttered and written is conditioned phenomenon. The Buddha never spoke in terms of philosophical issues but handled each situation to its conditioned state skillfully giving what was needed to set in motion the liberation from suffering for that specific situation. In the world but not of the world, so to speak.

In Chinese Mahayana the 'Mind only philosophy" only serves as a tool and not as an answer. In the same way solipsism and any western philosophical idea/concept can serve as a tool to help/assist awakening but can never be the answer.

Philosophy can also be a practical way of looking at the world. But to argue over this is arguing over vague definitions, not really about Buddhism itself.

Anyway, I came across this sutta:

Then Ven. Ananda went to the Blessed One and on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One, "It is said that the world is empty, the world is empty, lord. In what respect is it said that the world is empty?"

"Insofar as it is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self: Thus it is said, Ananda, that the world is empty. And what is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self? The eye is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self. Forms... Eye-consciousness... Eye-contact is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self.

I don't see how this would be a strategy. It's clearly a statement of there being no self in the world, the aggregates.

chownah wrote:and conversely can you think of any part (or the entirety) of the whole Universe which is not part of your experience?

Another person's privacy - another person's kamma, for example.

But of course another person's privacy is part of my experience as well as another person's kamma....this is certain evidence that I still have a doctrine of self which arises from time to time....by this I mean that another person's privacy as part of my experience manifests as a self concept for another person coupled with the idea that that self does something or has something which that person does not want another self to know about so I have indulged in a doctrine of self many times here first for myself and then for the person who has privacy and then for the things to be kept private and additionally I project a doctrine of self onto that private person as evidenced by my assumption that that person thinks that there are other selves from which things must be kept private.ANYTHING THAT IS NAMED IS EXPERIENTIAL AND EVERYTHING THAT IS NAMED IS EXPERIENTIAL............... or do you accept the delusion that all those "things out there" come complete with names as part of their innate makeup? Seems like it would be a lot of baggage for a photon to carry around with itself all of those names in all of those languages from all of those sentient entities throughout the universe(joke).chownah